🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
Posts: 19,350
|
|
« Reply #51 on: February 12, 2016, 04:46:57 PM » |
|
@ Virginia, I still don't see much of an argument for non-sea based deterrent. As long as you have enough subs so that three or four are always out you'll always have the power of second strike. ICBM's simply aren't needed (and mobile ones, as well as being costly, seem like a really bad idea, considering the ... reputation of the military in charge of missiles) in a post-Cold War context ; and bombers are based on a very dangerous game (i.e. that scrambling bombers will "demonstrate resolve" and deter an adversary (it would also free bombers up for conventional use).
@ Last Northerner, I do think that the US hegemony despite its flaws is better than if it were to drop off the face of the earth suddenly and let every nation start rearming itself en mass. Peace must be achieved multilaterally, otherwise other countries will just fill the vacuum. It's easy to fall in the common leftist trap of "US imperialism is the only force in the world", but other countries would quite happily fill the American's role if they vanished.
|